Ferraris for all

Watch the latest items on the Worldbytes internet television channel including a report on how Mumbai is embracing consumerism, an item challenging sustainable development and a defence of the freedom to film in public.

Labels: film, india, sustainability, Worldwrite

Frank Furedi argues on today’s spiked that, despite appearances, Cormac McCarthy’s The Road is not the one-sidedly bleak post-apocalpytic novel it is often assumed to be. It does make some more upbeat points about the human condition. He is more equivocal about the film version.

Meanwhile, a new series of Survivors, another post-apocalpytic tale from the BBC, starts next week.

Labels: apocalyptic, book, film, spiked

Bill Frezza, a partner at Adams Capital Management, has written a review on Real Clear Markets which is by far the most astute piece I have seen on Avatar. An extract from his article on James Cameron’s epic science fiction movie:

“I didn't see him in the credits but Al Gore, earth's first carbonless billionaire, must have been a script consultant. The arch villains are stick figure caricatures of greedy, baby-killing corporate capitalists. Unrepentant conquerors of nature, these amoral Halliburton proxies think nothing of shipping an army of mercenaries across interstellar space to plunder and pillage for profits. Do you think Cameron might still be suffering from a touch of Bush derangement syndrome?

“The heroes are pre-technological tribal environmentalists. They don't just hug trees, they worship them. Living loin-cloth lives in harmony with nature, they are content to follow the mystical ways of their shaman, whose beautiful daughter of course falls in love with a crippled marine seeking redemption. Money and technology mean as little to the natives as written language, leaving aside what Ralph Nader might have to say about their dangerous pterodactyl piloting. Try as they might the ugly Americans can't find anything to offer these noble savages in exchange for the valuable mineral deposits they're sitting on, not even universal health care. Despite technical marvels half a century ahead of ours, mining technology has somehow degenerated back to the open pit horrors of the past. The wise and selfless scientists who have fallen in love with the natives are powerless to stop the inevitable conflict. Cut loose the dogs of war - cue tanks, bulldozers, and bombs!”

Labels: climate, environment, film

Don’t worry if you’ve missed the apocalypse because another one will be along in a minute. After The Day of the Triffids aired on BBC over Christmas three post-apocalyptic thrillers – The Book of Eli, Daybreakers and The Road – will be out in the cinema in January.

Several commentators have remarked on the popularity of this genre but they tend not to understand its significance. Some relate it to climate change while others see it as part of a timeless eschatology.

In my view it should be linked to the profound sense of pessimism that has enveloped contemporary society.

Labels: apocalyptic, film, progress, television

The opening film to the Copenhagen summit, featuring a girl having a nightmare about catastrophic climate change, unwittingly reveals the pervasiveness of contemporary social pessimism. It assumes that our irresponsible actions today will cause devastating problems for our children in the future. The opposite possibility, that human action could improve our lives and those of our descendents, is not entertained.

Still it is probably not as bad as this evening’s BBC Horizon programme. It features David Attenborough, a veteran presenter of nature programmes, talking about human population. Given that he is a patron of the Optimum Population Trust it looks certain to take a Malthusian line.

Labels: climate, film, Malthus, science

Apocalyptic fiction is one way that the pervasive sense of limits in contemporary society is expressed. Two prominent examples discussed in this New York Times article are 2012 (directed by Roland Emmerich) and The Road, based on the Cormac McCarthy book of the same name, which opens this coming week in America. Emmerich was also the director of The Day After Tomorrow, one of the most hysterical films ever made about climate change.

Labels: apocalyptic, book, film

Until I caught up with the Pelican Brief, the 1993 legal thriller based on a John Grisham novel, on television I had not reallsed how much it reflects the environmentalist spirit of our times. The plot involves a law student (played by Julia Roberts) who stumbles across a conspiracy by a big oil company which involves gross environmental destruction (including the habitat of pelicans). To protect his commercial interests the evil oil magnate is willing to corrupt politicians up to and including America’s president.

For Roberts the lead role came several years before she played an environmental campaigner in Erin Brockovic (2000). She has since become a high profile green campaigner in her own right alongside the likes of George Clooney, Al Gore and Robert F Kennedy (see post of 17 May 2008).

Labels: celebrities, environment, film, television

For the time being I will limit my comments on this evenings debate at the RSA on consumerism (see 7 July post). Once the audio feed of the event is available on the RSA website I will post a link to this site. I will also post my review of Neal Lawson’s book when it is published on Monday.

However, a few points to note:

* The books on consumerism by Professor Matthew Hilton, one of this evening’s speakers, sound worth reading. They include his Consumerism in Twentieth Century Britain (Cambridge UP 2003) and Prosperity for All (Cornell UP 2008).

• Given the contemporary obsession with advertising I should get round to watching Mad Men, Matthew Weiner's television drama about the world of advertising in 1960s New York.

• Neal Lawson has generously proposed a return event at the RSA when my book is published next year. I would certainly be up for it.

Labels: book, consumption, ethics, film, speeches, television

Perhaps the biggest change in growth scepticism in the three years since I started writing this blog is the more overt character of Malthusianism. Openly expressing fears about overpopulation has become a mainstream preoccupation rather than confined to the fringes. Best-selling authors such as Thomas Friedman and Jeffrey Sachs have no compunction about talking about the supposed dangers of a crowded world.

On the United Nations World Population Day it is good to note there are voices opposing this reactionary shift. These include:

* Brendan O’Neill’s recent article on spiked on the myth of an overcrowded world. The piece also links to other spiked articles on a similar theme.

* Worldwrite’s Worldbytes two items on overpopulation in its latest programme.

* My Engineers Against Poverty debate (PDF) with the Optimum Population Trust in 2007 (see page 3).

* Frank Furedi’s book on Population and Development

Labels: consumption, film, Malthus, spiked, Worldwrite

The latest Worldbytes programme by Worldwrite is available online. I was particularly struck by the chill out desk item by Joe Kaplinsky on deforestation – a problem which obsesses the like of campaigners such as Prince Charles. Kaplinsky presents the problem as a symptom of a lack of rural development in contrast to the green view which presents economic growth as the problem. For example, the desperately poor will often collect fire wood as a way of earning a living. In contrast, more developed societies are in a better position to decide how best to manage the land, Other highlights of the programme include items on the supposed threats of hate speech, immigration, overpopulation and water shortages.

Labels: consumption, development, environment, film, Malthus, Worldwrite

Food Inc is the latest big budget environmental documentary following last month’s the end of the line on fishing (see 12 June 2009 post).

Robert Kenner, Food Inc’s director, was interviewed on Comedy Central’s the Daily Show last week. Although Jon Stewart, the Daily Show presenter, did not push Kenner hard it was in some ways revealing.

Kenner acknowledged that American life expectancy is still rising but claimed that diabetes would change that in the future. Given that Kenner argued a modern food lacks any nutrition and is often dangerous it is hard to see how his argument can be correct. If modern food is as terrible he suggests it would be expected to have shortened life expectancy substantially by now.

He also accepted that food makes up a lower proportion of household spending than ever before. Yet he somehow tried to find a way round this argument but arguing that high healthcare costs should be added to the cost of food.

Kenner gave no solution to the problem of the one billion people in the world who still live in hunger (see 21 June 2009 post).

On the case for factory farming and agribusiness see, for example, the posts of 15 April 2008, 20 July 2008 and 30 November 2008.

Food Inc is already out in America although I am not sure when it will be released in Britain.

Labels: consumption, film, food

I had been hoping for a quiet evening after a hectic week’s work but unexpectedly found myself in a battle with some fishy environmentalists and an even fisher journalist.

Since I finished work unexpectedly early I decided to go to see the End of The Line, a newly released documentary about over-fishing, as the only cinema where it is showing in London happens to be close by. But I had not realised that I was attending a special showing followed by a Q&A with the author of the book on which the film is based, Charles Clover, and an expert on fisheries from Imperial College London. It was more Daniel in an environmentalist shark pool, if you can have such a thing, than in the lions' den.

Most of the questions were about how to regulate overfishing. For example, does Britain need more fishery protection vehicles in a certain stretch of water? I decided the best thing for me to do was to pose a polite but pointed question. I asked Clover how the human need to feed about 6.5 billion could be met. A woman in the audience immediately heckled me to say it would soon be 9 billion people – most likely because she was concerned about “overpopulation” – but I simply agreed with her that we needed to feed that many.

Clover’s response was measured but he insisted that there were limits to what could be achieved by fish farming (even though I had not mentioned aquaculture). Nor did he see ways round the problem. Large fish in fish farms are evidently fed with small fish from the oceans, inefficiently in his view, but he insisted there is also a limit to the number of small fish we can eat. Nor did he see great potential in vegetarian fish, such as tilapia, which can be farmed but do not depend on other fish as food. Obviously his arguments against fish farming were well rehearsed but he did not come up with a solution to the problem I had posed.

At the end of the film a journalist from the London Paper, a daily free sheet, stood up and said he wanted comments from the audience on the “fantastic film” we had just seen. When I confronted him afterwards to point out he had violated the basics of objective journalism – in effect telling people what he wanted to hear – he did offer to interview me. But I countered that I would not trust him to write a balanced article as he had already decided what to say. He said his article should appear in the paper on Monday.

I was then accosted by a smug environmentalist who accused me of being a “cynic” as if it was a swear word. When I pointed out there was another side to the story he said his viewpoint was rational and right. Obviously it is wrong to extrapolate from one person’s views but it seems to me typical of many environmentalists to want to deny alternative voices the right to be heard.

Anyone who wants to read a critical review of the film should look up the piece by Rob Lyons on spiked.

I am now going to make myself a fish supper.

Labels: consumption, environment, ethics, film, food, science, technology

More attempts to redefine the American dream in diminished terms (see post of 6 March 2009).

The traditional conception of the American dream, as put forward by James Truslow Adams in his book The Epic of America in 1931 was of: “that dream of a land in which life should be better and richer and fuller for everyone”. But the desirability of becoming richer, or the link between wealth and a full life, is increasingly being called into question.

William Greider, a veteran left wing journalist, suggests an alternative idea which is explicitly opposed to the goal of becoming richer in an article in the Nation (and in turn an extract from his new book on Come Home America (Rodale Press)): “Here is the grand vision I suggest Americans can pursue: the right of all citizens to larger lives. Not to get richer than the next guy or necessarily to accumulate more and more stuff but the right to live life more fully and engage more expansively the elemental possibilities of human existence.” In essence Greider is proposing that Americans accept austerity – although he is too coy to use the word – and a vague hope that this will somehow lead to more fulfilling lives. The idea that the end of scarcity is a necessary condition for true freedom is alien to him.

Even more explicit is Ted Kulongoski, the governor of Oregon. He was recently quoted in the New York Times as arguing: “Other than taxes … the hardest thing I find to talk with my constituents and my citizens about is about changing lifestyles.” By “changing lifestyles” it is clear he means reduced living standards.

Finally, there is the story of stuff a 20 minute environmentalist video rant which has apparent had over six million viewings. At a conservative estimate I counted at least 20 serious misconceptions in 20 minutes. My favourite was her insistence that human baby milk is incredibly toxic one minute followed by her reassurance that breastfeeding is still best straight afterwards. It is hard to understand how she can justify giving what she claims is a highly poisonous substance to babies. I am no expert in child care but it seems to me incontrovertible proof of a mentality that is, to put it politely, confused.

Labels: America, book, consumption, film, growth

Spiked has published my review of Will Hutton’s Channel 4 television Dispatches documentary on how bankers caused the crisis. It is on the same theme as my session at the Battle for the Economy conference in London on 16 May.

Labels: economics, film, speeches, spiked

The following comment by me appeared in the latest Fund Strategy (4 May).

As time goes by, more sophisticated explanations for the economic crisis emerge. Working out which is correct is crucial to finding solutions. Clearly there are many elements involved in any comprehensive explanation of the downturn. But it is necessary to distinguish between those that are central to explaining the crisis and those that are contingent.

Will Hutton gave the most straightforward explanation for the crisis in his recent Channel 4 Dispatches documentary. For Hutton, as for many others, it was the fault of greedy bankers.

This argument at least has the virtue of simplicity. Dispatches featured many financial types confessing their responsibility, or at least that of their institutions, for the crisis. Not so much out of the horse’s mouth but, at least in Hutton’s view, the devil’s mouth.

But just because many people perceive something to be the case it does not make it true. From a common sense perspective it appears that the Earth is the ­centre of the universe and the sun revolves around it. Yet as far back as the 16th century scientists realised the sun is the centre of the solar system.

Just as with natural science, it is necessary for social science to go beyond superficial appearances. For example, it may appear to observers and even participants that aggressive risk-taking characterised the financial markets.

But the reality is much more paradoxical than such impressions suggest. Complex financial instruments developed in response to a demand to manage risk rather than to take big risks. Mortgage-backed securities, for instance, had the advantage of taking risk off the balance sheet of mortgage lenders. Yet the desire to manage risk simply meant that it reappeared in a new form.

The overproduction explanation for the crisis favoured by Michael Howell, the managing director of CrossBorderCapital, has more merit. He argues that there is a mismatch between the sharp rise in production – particularly from Asian producers – and the much slower increase in consumption. Therefore Howell characterises the downturn as one of overproduction while others have referred to its obverse, underconsumption.

The problem with this is that underconsumption itself has to be explained. It is not sufficient to describe it as a natural phenomenon, with production growing inherently faster than consumption. If people had the resources to consume more they no doubt would. The problem is identifying what it is about the market mechanism that creates this imbalance.

It appears there is a long-term trend towards falling profitability, particularly in the developed nations. This should not be taken to mean that the West is ­facing imminent collapse. But it does mean there is a constant drive for the market to try to find ways of overcoming its tendency towards breakdown.

Labels: economics, film, Fund Strategy, television

The concept of greed is central to the popular critique of capitalism. It is interesting therefore to trace how its use has evolved in recent years.

Until I read the article in this week’s Spectator by Fraser Nelson I did not realise that Gordon Brown had a book called Where There’s Greed published in 1987. Nelson quotes Brown denouncing the Conservatives and the “sinister insights of Adam Smith”. But it should be clear that what Brown really despises is the idea of progress and material advance. Indeed a key element of Smith’s philosophy was his link between these two elements.

Brown’s book was published in the same year as Oliver Stone’s Wall Street appeared in the cinema. The film is often remembered as a celebration of “greed” and the financial markets. In fact the intention of Stone’s film was clearly to satirise “greed”. Evidently Michael Douglas has just signed up to do a sequel to the movie in which he reprises the role of Gordon Gekko. It will focus on the recent turmoil in the financial markets.

Unravelling the concept of greed is becoming increasingly important to anyone who wants to defend economic growth and its link to progress.

Labels: book, consumption, film, finance, growth

I ‘m not a great fan of chick flicks but I had to see Confessions of a Shopaholic – for research purposes, you understand. Some of it was clearly true-to-life: the suave and sophisticated editor of a financial magazine who was the lead male character. But the film had a disappointingly predictable anti-consumerist message. When the debt-ridden female lead of the film finally escaped her fixation with shopping and luxury brands she finally had the time to lead a fulfilling life.

And it wasn’t nearly as funny as Legally Blonde.

Labels: affluenza, consumption, film, happiness

In response to my request for suggestions for my Austerity Watch column a friend sent me a link to a useful article from the 4 January edition of the British Observer newspaper. In it Paul Harris reported from New York on how luxury is increasingly being considered shameful. Among its useful points and references:

* The identification of a new cultural trend dubbed “luxury shame”.

* A column by Bob Herbert in the New York Times on 26 December 2008 headlined “Stop Being Stupid”. It concludes: “we need to start living within our means and get past the nauseating idea that the essence of our culture and the be-all and end-all of the American economy is the limitless consumption of trashy consumer goods.”

* A rash of new movies bashing bankers is coming out. On 27 February The International, starring Clive Owen, will be released in Britain. According to the summary on the Internet Movie Database: “Interpol Agent Louis Salinger and Manhattan Assistant District Attorney Eleanor Whitman are determined to bring to justice one of the world's most powerful banks. Uncovering illegal activities including money laundering, arms trading, and the destabilization of governments, Salinger and Whitman's investigation takes them from Berlin to Milan to New York and to Istanbul. Finding themselves in a high-stakes chase across the globe, their relentless tenacity puts their own lives at risk as the bank will stop at nothing - even murder - to continue financing terror and war.”

Meanwhile, I have added “Austerity Watch” tags to some of my earlier blog posts. It reminded me that many of the arguments for austerity now being pitched in terms of the economic crisis were not long ago related to climate change.

Labels: Austerity Watch, climate, consumption, economics, film, finance

Just saw Slumdog Millionaire, Danny Boyle’s film about an 18-year-old from the slums of Bombay who overcomes adversity to win the Indian version of Who Wants to be a Millionaire? The film does not have a explicit political message but there is something unhealthy about its obsession with India’s urban squalor. The characters tend to be portrayed as either victims of terrible abuse or abusers themselves. A central character in the film moves from being one to the other. To be fair the ending is, on balance, happy but it is presented as thanks to fate and perhaps luck more than anything else.

I have not read it yet but the obsession with India’s squalid cities probably informs the popularity of White Tiger, Aravind Adiga’s Man Booker prize-winning novel (see post of 15 October 2008). A similar preoccupation is apparent in films on slum dwellers in other countries such as Circus of God (Brazil 2002) and Tsotsi (South Africa 2005).

The pedigree of those involved in making Slumdog Millionaire is also telling. Danny Boyle, its director, is best known for Trainspotting (1996), a tale of urban squalor and depravity in Edinburgh. Simon Beaufoy, who wrote the screenplay, made his name by writing The Full Monty (1997), a tale of former Sheffield steelworkers as laughable victims.

Something about urban squalor and violence seems to attract a particular kind of middle class imagination. I suspect if they saw urban dwellers as more of a political threat, rather than as simply decadent or pathetic, they might not be sympathetic.

Labels: cities, film, india, inequality

Two more examples of the popularity of the post-apocalyptic genre. This evening the BBC Survivors programme – a remake of a 1970s series – was first aired. It is the cheery tale of a world in which a global flu pandemic has killed 90% of the population. This week also saw the launch in Britain of Blindness, a movie about a world in which millions of people have gone blind.

For more on the “post-apocalyptic” genre see posts of 24 April 2008, 9 September 2008, 19 October 2008. I have also created an “apocalyptic” tag.

Labels: apocalyptic, film, television

Rob Killick reminds us in a review of the Beider Meinhoff Complex on spiked that anti-materialism was a significant trend in 1960s radicalism. He portrays the leaders of the 1960s Germany terrorist gang as an extreme part of a broader trend which saw itself: “as part of an international movement of opposition to imperialism, but made no effort to build links with the working class in Germany, which they saw as in thrall to capitalist consumerist ideology”. Killick ends with the correct point that the elitist belief in a stupid consumerist working class is now widespread.

Labels: consumption, Europe, film, Germany, spiked

This evening I was interviewed by Al Jazeera on this week’s market and economic developments.

Labels: economics, film, media appearances, television

An interesting article by Sameer Panya in Miller McCune on apocalyptic visions in movies, popular books and TV. Examples he points to include the Dark Knight (the latest Batman movie - evidently shows the Joker trying to destroy the world for sheer pleasure), Wall-E (see my post of 21 July 2008), Battlestar Gallactica (the recent TV version) and Cormac McCarthy’s The Road ( a novel which comes out as a film later this year). Two recent books examine this phenomenon: In Apocalyptic Dread by Kirsten Moana Thompson and Shocking Representation by Adam Lowenstein.

I wrote about apocalpytic visions in non-fiction in my post of 24 April 2008. I also used the introduction from Mad Max II to introduce my recent Fund Strategy feature on oil (see 26 August 2008 post).

Such visions seem to represent, in an extreme form, the fear of the future that is so prevalent at present.

Labels: apocalyptic, book, film

The BBC2 Newsnight programme this evening completely succumbed to the panic about water shortages. Its underlying assumption was simple: population growth and industrialisation are leading to greater use of this scarce commodity. This in turn is leading to the prospect of conflict and even water wars worldwide.

Sadly none of the studio guests challenged the fetishisation of water. It is wrong to see water as causing conflict – water is just “stuff” – the problem is the lack of investment in infrastructure to ensure everyone has enough water. Nor is it true that water is a finite resource (see, for example, posts of 22 August 2006, 19 October 2006 and 12 March 2008).

Worldwrite is also producing a documentary on this topic called Flush It!. Hopefully it will provide an antidote to such scare-mongering. Its premiere is at the Battle of Ideas festival on 2 November.

Labels: consumption, environment, film, television, water, Worldwrite

Not Evil Just Wrong, an anti-environmentalist documentary by two Irish film-makers, sounds interesting. From an account in the Sunday Times (London) it sounds like a much needed antidote to Al Gore’s An Inconvenient Truth.

Labels: climate, environment, film

Spiked has run my review of Wall-E, Disney Pixar’s new anti-consumerist movie featuring a recycling robot as its central character and humans as little more than fat blobs.

Labels: apocalyptic, consumption, ethics, film, spiked

The green message is so pervasive nowadays that it extends from children’s cartoons (see 13 July 2008 post) to god. Speaking at an event in Sydney, Australia, this week the pope recycled the predictable message of self-restraint and anti-consumption:

“Religions have a special role in this regard, for they teach people that authentic service requires sacrifice and self-discipline, which in turn must be cultivated through self-denial, temperance and a moderate use of the world’s goods. In this way, men and women are led to regard the environment as a marvel to be pondered and respected rather than a commodity for mere consumption. It is incumbent upon religious people to demonstrate that it is possible to find joy in living simply and modestly, generously sharing one’s surplus with those suffering from want.”

Evidently for god’s representative on earth “living simply and modestly” - what most people call poverty - should be treated as a joy. Let us pray that he is not taken seriously.

Labels: consumption, ethics, film

Evidently Wall-E, a new animated movie from Pixar, argues if we do not curb our consumption we will destroy the world. According to an article in Slate critics have widely welcomed the outlook it expresses:

“So what is this powerful and profound message? Wall-E tells us that if we don't change the way we live, we'll all get really fat and destroy the world. The plot begins with the idea that a megacorporation called Buy N Large has essentially taken over the planet and induced so much consumption and waste that humans must escape their dying planet on an enormous, space-faring cruise ship. Once onboard, their self-destructive tendencies only get worse: After 700 years adrift, humans have grown too bloated to walk and too lazy to think.”

Labels: apocalyptic, consumption, environment, film

It seems that British documentary film-makers are becoming obsessed with cheap labour in India. After the awful Blood, Sweat and T-Shirts on BBC (see 18 April 2008 and 14 May 2008 posts) it seems that Panorama has a programme on the topic next week while Channel 4 is planning one entitled The Devil Wears Primark (see 1 June 2008 post).

In a pre-emptive strike against possible criticism from Panorama it seems that Primark, a bargain clothes retailing chain, has cut ties with Indian suppliers that used child labour.

There seems to be little understanding that simply cutting such ties is likely to make the plight of poor Indians worse. Child labour is a symptom of extreme poverty rather than its cause.

It is reminiscent of the spoilt western fashionistas in Blood, Sweat and T-Shirts hectoring Indian workers about how their working conditions are “disgusting”. Indians are well aware that they are poor - the difficult part is finding ways to make them rich.

The broader context for this discussion is the feigned concern for developing country workers from the likes of Joseph Stiglitz (see 6 May 2008 post).

Labels: consumption, ethics, film, india, inequality

I was planning to watch The Devil Wears Primark, yet another documentary on Indian sweatshops (see posts of 18 April 2008 and 14 May 2008), on Channel 4 this evening. However, despite being trailed last week, it seems to have mysteriously disappeared from the TV listings. Perhaps satanic forces associated with the cheap clothes retailer are at work?

Labels: consumption, film, india, inequality

Tonight watched the Life after people documentary on Channel 4. It was based on an interesting thought experiment: what would happen to the earth if humans suddenly disappeared. The documentary looked at the Earth at different time periods of humanity’s disappearance to see how long signs of humanity would survive. No doubt many environmentalists would see it as showing that humanity is simply a thin veneer on the surface of the earth – nature would quickly reclaim the planet. But it would also be possible to wonder at how much humans have reshaped the planet in their relatively short time on Earth. Josie Appleton also wrote a review article on the same subject for spiked last year.

Last night I watched the 11th Hour, a 2007 environmentalist documentary presented and produced by Leonardo DiCaprio, on Channel 4. The programme was predictably awful but at least it had the virtue of spelling out some of the misanthropic (and often absurd) premises of environmentalist thought. For example, the view that humans are simply part of nature, the hostility to attempts to control nature, the idea that nature should somehow be endowed with rights and the notion of eco-systems services.

Labels: celebrities, environment, film, spiked

I am hardly a regular reader of Marie Claire but I was struck by how its June eco-chic edition managed to combine environmentalism, beauty and celebrity. Amid the adverts for brands such as D&G, Estee Lauder and Clinique are Cate Blanchett endorsing Marie Claire’s campaign to stop global warming, profiles of Hollywood stars turned eco-campaigners (including Gwyneth Paltrow, Jake Gyllenhaal and Julia Roberts) and an interview with Hugh Fearnley-Whittingstall.

I was particularly amused by the “Message from our associates” at coolaworld:

“Just being cool is a beautifully simple way to save the planet”.

“Being cool means having a passionate relationship with the world around you, a growing awareness of where things come from and how they arrive. Being cool is shopping to save the planet, saying yes to tap water and no to excess packaging. Being cool is ‘Fashion without Heart’ and food without air miles and, because it helps you feel good about the environment, being cool will always be considered stylish and smart.”

If such self-obsession is considered “cool” then I’m all in favour of some warming.

Labels: celebrities, consumption, environment, film, food

The cover story of today’s New York Times magazine looks at celebrities and the causes they support. It focuses particularly on Natalie Portman as she is evidently an “ambassador” for the Foundation for International Community Assistance (Finca) a microfinance organisation. Others mentioned in the piece include Bono, George Clooney, Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt.

No doubt even many of the critics would argue that at least celebrities do some good by raising “awareness” of important issues. In fact, as Mick Hume has previously argued on spiked, such initiatives are typically based on the assumption that the West has to “save” the people of the third world from themselves. In the case of Natalie Portman she is – inadvertently no doubt – reinforcing low horizons in relation to development when she promotes microfinance.

Labels: celebrities, development, ethics, film, finance, spiked

Worldwrite has produced two new short films. Cash Back is a look at the importance of remittances to economic development in the third world. For the poorest countries it can be several times the amount of official development assistance or foreign direct investment. I’m a Subsistence Farmer Get Me Out of Here is an attack on those who romanticise the lives of those who are tied to the land (itself a shortened form of a more substantial documentary made by Worldwrite). Both films can be viewed online by clicking on the links.

Labels: aid, development, economics, film, Worldwrite

A new documentary from Worldwrite, an education charity, examines the question of corruption from an African perspective. In Corruptababble two young South Africans, Brendon and Yolanda, travel around London and Edinburgh to gauge perceptions of corruption. Virtually everyone they speak to sees corruption as a big problem in Africa but few come even close to being able to back up their arguments. Most simply assert that corruption must be largely to blame for Africa’s difficulties while many others argue it is a more extreme form of corruption in the West.

The people shown to have the most coherent explanation for corruption are free marketers speaking at a conference on development. They argue in detail that Africa is poor because predatory African elites have siphoned off money for their own benefit. But such arguments have a strongly apologetic character. Blaming Africans for the continent’s lack of development is a way of diverting responsibility from the West or the weaknesses of the market system.

Corruptababble is a step towards challenging one of the most enduring myths about Africa. Anyone who supports African development needs to be able to challenge the unhealthy obsession with corruption.

Labels: Africa, corruption, film, Worldwrite

Worldwrite, an education charity which produces films promoting third world development, has produced its first newsreel. The film is based on a critical discussion of the recent G8 summit of world leaders. I was on the panel along with Philip Cunliffe and Stuart Simpson (see 29 May post). It can currently be viewed from the Worldwrite homepage here.

Labels: Africa, development, film, media appearances, Worldwrite

Russell Jacoby, a professor of history at UCLA, has written an astute review article in the Nation on the redefinition of capitalism in terms of consumption. Although the idea is not new in itself a new book on consumer culture by Benjamin Barber, a political theorist, takes it further by arguing that the latest stage of capitalism is driven by an “infantilist ethos”. However, Jacoby argues that this idea is not really developed. Instead Barber takes readers on a familiar discussion of “hyper-consumerism” driven by privatisation, branding and total marketing.

Jacoby is also sceptical about the solutions that Barber offers:

“In the last section of the book Barber sketches out "a moderate and democratic way" to resist consumer capitalism. He wants to restore capitalism to "its primary role" as an efficient producer and to uphold the "democratic public" as the regulator of "our plural life worlds." But the weakness of his ideas shows through his PowerPoint presentations. He locates three types of consumer resistance and subversion: "I will discuss them under the rubrics cultural creolization, cultural carnivalization and cultural jamming." By creolization, he means the effort to turn market brands against the market, where commodification serves heretical groups or movements, like Hasidic rock, in which ultra-orthodox Gad Elbaz sets pious lyrics to throbbing rhythms. By "jamming" Barber means tactics derived mainly from Kalle Lasn, founder of Adbusters magazine. In Lasn's words, the jammers paint their "own bike lanes, reclaim streets, 'skull' Calvin Klein ads, and paste GREASE stickers on tables and trays at McDonald's restaurants." “

Jacoby also criticises other ideas by Barber on muting the impact of the market:

“In addition to his three forms of cultural resistance Barber comes up with other, more disparate, perhaps desperate, efforts to rein in the market--such as consumer activism (dolphin-safe tuna), creative video games (SimCity) and especially George Clooney movies (Good Night, and Good Luck and Syriana). Barber is only the latest progressive to go gaga over Hollywood. He dreams its milquetoast offerings are revolutionary provocations. Movies like Bulworth, with Warren Beatty, and American Dreamz, with Hugh Grant, demonstrate Hollywood's "own dialectical capacity to generate rebellion and subversion." It is more likely that they demonstrate Barber's capacity for wishful thinking. The ravages of the market in the impoverished Third World also catch Barber's attention--at least for ten pages. Here too he finds counter-movements or partial remedies like Doctors Without Borders's 500-calorie Plumpy Nut bar, which is "a miracle cure for the starving," and Nobel Prize-winning economist Muhammad Yunus's idea of microcredits for the very poor.”

So, at least judging by Jacoby’s review, Barber has an insight into the contemporary market he does not properly pursue. As a result Barber comes up with mundane solutions to what he sees as the problem.

Labels: America, book, consumption, film, finance

Yesterday I spoke at the worldwide premiere of Think Big, a new documentary by Worldwrite, at an event organised by the Great Debate in Newcastle (see 4 January post). The film shows how Ghanaians have the same ambitions and needs as Westerners. Like those in the developed world they want comfortable homes, access to modern technology and fulfilling worse. Only in a relatively poor country like Ghana it is harder to achieve such goals.

Like most Western audiences those in Newcastle said they were all in favour of development. Yet, also in a typical way, they then raised concerns about corruption, the environment, inequality and indigenous culture. I countered by arguing that the debate about development nowadays does not typically take the form of a clash between those who are in favour and those who are consciously against. Instead the mainstream view redefines development in a narrower way in response to the kinds of concerns outlined above. So what today passes for “development” is in fact hostile to the genuine modernisation, urbanisation and industrialisation of poorer societies.

Labels: Africa, development, film, speeches, Worldwrite

Last weekend I debated the Battle for Affluence at the Battle of Ideas festival. The thrust of my argument was that affluence has proved enormously beneficial for humanity and will continue to do so. In contrast others, such as Professor Avner Offer of Oxford university and Mark Easton of the BBC, argued that our preoccupation with prosperity has gone too far. In their view other factors, such as well-being, should be the main focus of government policy. Others on the panel included Professor Nicholas Crafts of Warwick university and Jenny Davey of the Times (London). Later that evening I also debated Professor Offer on BBC Radio Five Live.

At the conference I also chaired a session in which Damned by Debt Relief, a film made by Worldwrite, had its world premiere. The film showed how the Highly Indebted Poor Country (HIPC) initiative imposes new conditions on the poor but does not offer any new money. A trailer for the film can be viewed here.

Other sessions at the weekend included a debate on the “happiness trap” and a series on the Battle over Nature.

Labels: affluenza, film, happiness, media appearances, radio, speeches, Worldwrite

I hesitate to write too much on climate change because it could easily become a full-time preoccupation. But given it is increasingly used as the ultimate argument against affluence it is difficult to avoid devoting time to it.

George Monbiot’s new book on climate change, serialised in three parts in the Guardian, provides a model of how not to conduct the debate. Yesterday there was an article on 'the denial industry' which focused on ExxonMobil. He made a similar film for the BBC Newsnight programme which was broadcast this evening. The main point of both was that ExxonMobil is financing “climate change deniers” – including the Competitive Enterprise Institute, the Cato Institute, the Heritage Foundation, the Hudson Institute, the Frontiers of Freedom Institute, the Reason Foundation and the Independent Institute – to misrepresent the truth on climate change in order to protect its profits.

There are two reasons why this argument is flawed. First, the fact that anyone receives finance from a particular source, even one with a vested interest, does not prove that an argument is wrong. I could be paid by the Devil Inc to produce this website but that does not invalidate my arguments (as it happens I am entirely self-financed). Second, it is misleading to talk to climate change “denial”. Only a lunatic would deny that the climate is changing and most specialists seem to accept that humans have played a role in warming. What needs to be debated is the character of the change (a scientific question) and how best to respond to it (a political question).

Monbiot cites a website with the sole aim of exposing Exxon . He has also set up a new website of his own , along with Mark Lynas and Joss Garman, to argue solely on climate change. There is also a speaking tour on the book.

Labels: book, climate, corporations, environment, film, television

Spiked has today published my review of An Inconvenient Truth. In it I argue that Al Gore’s dogmatic documentary embodies the worst possible response to climate change. It can be found by clicking on the appropriate link in the reviews section on the bar on the left hand side of this site.

However, as a critique of Gore’s pretentious style it is hard to do better than South Park. An Inconvenient Truth was ruthlessly lampooned in its episode on ManBearPig.

Labels: climate, film, review, spiked, television

Three short versions of Worldwrite documentaries, putting the case for real development from different angles, are now available on the internet. Bisease story – A letter to Geldof looks at Bob Geldof’s broken promises to a Ghanaian village. Damned by Debt Relief examines the grim reality of the Highly Indebted Poor Country (HIPC) initiative on debt relief. Carry on up the NGO shows that non-governmental organisations do not cater for the real needs of people in the third world. The films can be viewed for free at documentary-film.net although registration is required.

Labels: Africa, development, film, Worldwrite

Much of my writing on growth scepticism has appeared on Spiked-online; an independent online publication which describes itself as having the modest ambition of making history as well as reporting it. My recent articles include a contribution to its Enlightening the future 2024 project and a piece on the extradition of the “NatWest three” to Texas from Britain. The latter is a first attempt at dealing with what could be called the “paradox of inequality”: those who have the least suffer the most as a result of contemporary attacks on affluence. I also sometimes write on other topics, such as my essay on Steven Spielberg’s film Munich , but these articles will not generally appear on this site.

Labels: corruption, film, inequality, review, spiked

The slogan “Ferraris for all” comes for Worldwrite; an education charity campaigning for real development in the third world. Ceri Dingle, the director of the charity, was evidently asking some of its volunteers what they would really like to have. They said Ferarris. I am sure they did not necessarily mean it literally. No doubt Lamborghinis, McLarens or Maseratis would do for some. The point is that everyone should have access to the best that the world has to offer.

I appeared in the Bitter Aftertaste; a short documentary Worldwrite made criticising fair trade. To view the film on the internet click HERE. I have also written an article on the subject, called the coffee con , for Spiked.

On 28 October I will be chairing a discussion of Worldwrite’s new film Damned by Debt Relief at the Battle of Ideas festival. In 2005 I wrote an article on debt relief for Spiked.

Labels: development, film, media appearances, speeches, spiked, trade, Worldwrite